Support NeoGAF

[DeaconKnowledge]

The separation is that one costs $500 and one costs $150.

By your own logic, Nintendo has no motivation to invest millions in huge games like Zelda when they can sell millions of copies of Wii Play. It doesn't really hold. There are legions of people who want to see gaming grow. We used to watch black and white silent films, now we have IMAX. Its just progress.

Every gaming generation has been more expensive and initially smaller installed base than its predecessor. But developers understand that you have to make these investments early on so you can cash in later.

WHAT?

Nintendo has motivation to make huge epics because they make money. In the same vein, the PS3 was created to continue to make money after the PS2 had been put to bed. If the PiiS2 was introduced, then would it not effectively kill the interest inPS3 from both developers and the buying public? Hell, isn't the entire crux of your argument that Sony should make a PiiS2 because the Wii is stomping the PS3 now?

My mind is blown. Seriously. I need some water.

 

[Pureauthor]

i'm referring to userbase. even the most non-gamer people will have a handheld just to have something to do. why do you think they sell so much? no one expects raw power out of a handheld, just something fun that they can play on the go.

Explain how the GBA sold less than the PS2 then.

Your point is ridiculous and historically untrue. Prior to the DS, most nongamers didn't own handhelds at all. If they 'wanted something to do' they used cellphone games like Snake to while away the time, not Pokemon.

Plus, I have a sneaking suspicion more hardcore gamers game on handhelds than they do on cellphones...

 

[dammitmattt]

You were the one who started the comparison with the N64 and PS1 not receiving dev support, so naturally the comparison had to be made to the other machines on the market that actually are still receiving dev support - of which PS2 is the weakest.

My point was and is that - hardware power has nothing to do with the choices made for development.

I said nothing about receiving dev support. My point was that if graphics don't matter, why aren't we still playing games that look like N64/PS1 games.

OF COURSE GRAPHICS MATTER.

 

[theBishop]

MP3's were a huge step back for music, which until that point had always increased in technology. LP <<< Cassette <<< CD >>> MP3. Why did it work? The consumer was willing to trade down quality in exchange for something else, in this case, convenience and portability.

Of course there are audiophiles who have scoffed at the inferior MP3 format, but they are niche and do not motivate the market.

In what way is Wii more convenient or portable than next-gen consoles? Or perhaps more importantly, why does a console need to be portable?

 

[dammitmattt]

Graphics only matter to a vocal minority - incidentally, the minority that, while yelling the loudest, is in action generally the most compliant to the way the gaming industry turns.

Console sales have proven time and time again - graphics don't matter to the mass market.

I've never said that graphics matter more than gameplay, but if graphics didn't matter at all like you and Link are claiming, we'd still be playing PS1 and N64 games and there would never have been a PS2.

 

[Pureauthor]

I said nothing about receiving dev support. My point was that if graphics don't matter, why aren't we still playing games that look like N64/PS1 games.

But... we are. In fact, go check up on the most popular game of last generation. And the most popular game of this generation.

I've never said that graphics matter more than gameplay, but if graphics didn't matter at all like you and Link are claiming, we'd still be playing PS1 and N64 games and there would never have been a PS2.

Console cycles have practically nothing to do with graphics and nearly everything to do with competition.

 

[Tobor]

In what way is Wii more convenient or portable than next-gen consoles? Or perhaps more importantly, why does a console need to be portable?

No, no you misunderstood what I said. MP3's are more convenient and portable.

In the case of the Wii, consumers are exchanging the traditional graphics boost for the new control scheme.

I edited my previous post to make more sense.

 

[DeaconKnowledge]

I've never said that graphics matter more than gameplay, but if graphics didn't matter at all like you and Link are claiming, we'd still be playing PS1 and N64 games and there would never have been a PS2.

Nobody said that.

 

[felipeko]

I said nothing about receiving dev support. My point was that if graphics don't matter, why aren't we still playing games that look like N64/PS1 games.

OF COURSE GRAPHICS MATTER.

I still play N64 games

And have no problem with the graphics. But of course i would love it to have better graphics, but i don't want to pay high for it.. the industry can wait 5 years just to have an affordable price.

 

[koam]

I said nothing about receiving dev support. My point was that if graphics don't matter, why aren't we still playing games that look like N64/PS1 games.

OF COURSE GRAPHICS MATTER.

Graphics don't matter anymore. N64 and PS1 graphics sucked. GCN/PS2/XBOX are good enough for most people.

 

[TheKingsCrown]

I said nothing about receiving dev support. My point was that if graphics don't matter, why aren't we still playing games that look like N64/PS1 games.

OF COURSE GRAPHICS MATTER.

The whole graphics enhancing gameplay argument is fine and well, but the fact of the matter is that graphics have not propelled the $400 and $600 360 and PS3 past the 350,000 units the Wii is selling per month in the U.S., where, arguably, graphics are a HUGE component to purchase decisions.

So...do they matter? Yes, but right now one COULD argue they do not matter a flying **** because you have two consoles which are priced beyond the average consumer's willingness to pay.

 

[dammitmattt]

But... we are. In fact, go check up on the most popular game of last generation. And the most popular game of this generation.

Madden? Grand Theft Auto? The Sims?

Are you referring to a handheld game?

 

[Pureauthor]

Graphics don't matter anymore. N64 and PS1 graphics sucked. GCN/PS2/XBOX are good enough for most people.

You don't get it either. N64 and PS1 are still good enough for most people.

Madden? Grand Theft Auto? The Sims?

Are you referring to a handheld game?

Now that you mention it, none of those games were graphics powerhouses either.

And yes, I'm referring to a handheld game. I already mentioned it in this thread.

 

[dammitmattt]

Nobody said that.

There are about 8 people saying that at this moment. Only one person actually clarified it with any kind of sense (thanks, Koam).

 

[LCGeek]

For $75 more ($50 price difference + $25 memory card to save games), you get everything you mentioned above with the Xbox 360 Core system. It doesn't cost $150 to condense the Gamecube components into the Wii form factor. If that were the case, why didn't the PS2 slimline cost more than the PS2 did at the time?

The fact that Nintendo is probably the first mainstream console to profit immediately out of the gate in this razor/razor blade business should tell you that Nintendo could've done much, much more, but they made a very specific decision not to. Apparently, most people don't care and are buying up Wiis left and right, but that doesn't mean that I don't care.

I had premium system that died and well a console isn't that much money to me anyways btw no cost for hd or vga cables after all 480p ain't HD and if ain't HD it ain't next gen.

Nintendo didn't condense gamecube components. Broadway is new ibm 750 variant not a cxe which gecko is. Hollywood was a ground up customized doubled up extension of flipper it's definetly new because the chip is way beefier in size for a flipper die shrink. 64MB GDDR3 and 512MB memory were never in the GC spec either. Instead of GOD disks we now have DVD. The system has been out for more than a few months and people are still spewing the gc/wii argument that's been debunked for sometime.

Where does this stupid notion for hc gamers come from that if a manufacturer isn't losing money on hardware they didn't go the distance for you? Nintendo didn't have to upgrade Wii like they did they really could've left it gc in everyway. How do you ignore the fact that they wanted something disgustlingly small and low power consumption along with perfect bc? Think you can have hd with 60watts of power or less? Obviously your needs weren't nintendo, but you have to think about things from their perspective sometimes to understand a situation.

The PS2 situation mentioned isn't applicable to nintendo or even ms really. Sony does a lot of the stuff in house which drives production cost down even more than what most manufacturers usually have to deal with.

 

[ComputerNerd]

Jump the gun much?

Image will be fun to post when Wii sales implode next year though...

You are funny one!

 

[theBishop]

WHAT?

Nintendo has motivation to make huge epics because they make money. In the same vein, the PS3 was created to continue to make money after the PS2 had been put to bed. If the PiiS2 was introduced, then would it not effectively kill the interest inPS3 from both developers and the buying public? Hell, isn't the entire crux of your argument that Sony should make a PiiS2 because the Wii is stomping the PS3 now?

My mind is blown. Seriously. I need some water.

Is Wii's success killing PS3 and Xbox360? Even with its current sales figures, are the next-gen consoles losing exclusives to the Wii? Is any major franchise using Wii as its primary platform?

I think there's room for both approaches. If Nintendo is going to try to bring in new consumers to gaming, then it would be moronic for Sony to hand it over uncontested. A relatively small investment gets them a seat at the table, which is better than nothing.

 

[dammitmattt]

You don't get it either. N64 and PS1 are still good enough for most people

Only in a portable form where the flaws are covered up. I have yet to see evidence presented that millions and millions of people are still playing their N64s and PS1s, and buying games for them.

 

[Link]

There are about 8 people saying that at this moment. Only one person actually clarified it with any kind of sense (thanks, Koam).

We're saying that they are hardly a first priority. They aren't nearly as important as you're making them out to be. Everyone can appreciate good graphics, but for a large percentage of the population, graphics are not going to be a dealbreaker for a game.

 

[schuelma]

Is Wii's success killing PS3 and Xbox360? Even with its current sales figures, are the next-gen consoles losing exclusives to the Wii? Is any major franchise using Wii as its primary platform?

I think there's room for both approaches. If Nintendo is going to try to bring in new consumers to gaming, then it would be moronic for Sony to hand it over uncontested. A relatively small investment gets them a seat at the table, which is better than nothing.

While I generally agree with you in the West, I see the Wii hurting Sony big time in Japan.

 

[taconinja]

I really don't get posts like this. From your post history, you clearly hate the Wii, yet you'd want to see Sony do the exact same thing Nintendo is currently doing. Would this make you feel better? The experience being the same, but with the company you prefer's logo being on the side instead? Why don't you try playing games instead of brand names?

Having watched these arguments for several days now, I've been wondering this myself. Why do people that rage against the Wii seem so eager to see Sony make a knock-off? They keep proclaiming that it isn't that they hate Nintendo and love Sony, but they're terrified that "next gen" won't happen and their "epic games" will crumble to dust.

How does this PiiS2 not facilitate that nightmare scenario?

Why would a Sony version of the Wii be a good thing?

 

[Pureauthor]

Only in a portable form where the flaws are covered up. I have yet to see evidence presented that millions and millions of people are still playing their N64s and PS1s, and buying games for them.

No, they aren't buying those games anymore. Know why?

Because there're no longer N64 and PS1 games to buy.

Your logic astounds.

Even on the portable space, consumers are flocking en masse to the DS and choosing it over the PSP. Why is that?

 

[theBishop]

Graphics don't matter anymore. N64 and PS1 graphics sucked. GCN/PS2/XBOX are good enough for most people.

Until something like Lair or Mass Effect comes out that wouldn't be possible on last-gen technology, and you realize that graphics are only part of the story.

 

[Starchasing]

That is much dumber thing to say. Your last line is right, but that has nothing to do with Apple caring about customers. It's just a simple matter of supplying or creating demand. If Apple cared more about its customers, they would have cheaper prices and longer warranties.

In order to be a costumer you must want the product at that price and being able to pay so much. People who do not like the product, people who think it is to expensive or people that can afford them are not costumers. Thats one tipical confusion amongst people.

Nintendo cares about the people who want a wii and can pay for it. For the rest of people they dont care.

It might be that way in Europe, but HD is catching on in the US and not having HD will only become a bigger issue in the future for the Wii. Also, I've had a Wii since launch day and tech has always been an issue to me.

Are people buying HDTV sets because HDTV or because they are bigger, flatter and prettier? I think you will be surprised at the answer. Most techie people think about specs first, resolution, pixels colours, blah blah. People think about convenience, status and other things.

Do the millions of ipod users care about OGG? Or do they use the more shitty sounding MP3? Do they like the convenience of having all their songs in a cool little easy to use machine? Or do they go around with superior sounding discman?

At the end like in most of this cases is a problem of the view of a techie against the view of the majority. The mojority seems to love the Wii and DS and the techies still wonder why

 

[schuelma]

Until something like Lair or Mass Effect comes out that wouldn't be possible on last-gen technology, and you realize that graphics are only part of the story.

Gears of War was possible on last-gen technology?

 

[Razoric]

Why would a Sony version of the Wii be a good thing?

It wouldn't be... at all.

You have to remember the forum you are at though. People waste hours making charts and graphs of sales data for their favorite systems. It's all about 'winning' the masses whatever the cost. And if Sony can 'come back' with PiiS2 then they can have their revenge trolling with their own sales charts. It's actually pretty sad if you take a step back from all of this and take an objective look at it.

 

[Grecco]

Gears of War was possible on last-gen technology?

Yes?

 

[Link]

Is Wii's success killing PS3 and Xbox360?

Well, we really won't ever know that. Would the PS3 still be selling as terrible as it is now if the Wii didn't exist, or would it be flying out the gate? That's not a question anyone here can answer.

Even with its current sales figures, are the next-gen consoles losing exclusives to the Wii? Is any major franchise using Wii as its primary platform?

Wasn't NiGHTS originally going to be for PS3/360? Besides that, I think it'd be wise to wait until after E3 to revisit this argument.

 

[Phife Dawg]

Blame Shane Bettenhausen. He started it. Hopefully they will expand on the discussion on 1upyours tomorrow. Shane can get a little excitable.

Well it has been stated a few times before and then there was this huge thread about it. But it seems that this Shane character has encouraged people even more.

It wouldn't be so bad if the whole idea wouldn't be so mindboggingly stupid. But this has all been discussed in that huge thread.

 

[OnWarmerMusic]

Is Wii's success killing PS3 and Xbox360? Even with its current sales figures, are the next-gen consoles losing exclusives to the Wii? Is any major franchise using Wii as its primary platform?

I think there's room for both approaches. If Nintendo is going to try to bring in new consumers to gaming, then it would be moronic for Sony to hand it over uncontested. A relatively small investment gets them a seat at the table, which is better than nothing.

I think you'd get a ripple effect from third parties, though. Sony embracing waggle with a PiiS2 means that devs can now make a game which can be easily ported across the Wii and the PiiS2, and do it for far less than they could making a PS3/360 game. From the word go, it's already more lucrative for developers, so you'd have a talent migration from the PS3 to the waggle consoles. It would leave the PS3 in a very, very poor position, imo.

 

[MattXG]

One of OA's brightest and best right here folks.

Well, I did predict, early last year, PS3's price exactly ($600) and I did predict its failure right up to the point of saying it'd struggle to make 6 digit figures during this summer...


And now I'm calling Wii's implosion. Bookmark it.

 

[taconinja]

It wouldn't be... at all.

You have to remember the forum you are at though. People waste hours making charts and graphs of sales data for their favorite systems. It's all about 'winning' the masses whatever the cost. And if Sony can 'come back' with PiiS2 then they can have their revenge trolling with their own sales charts. It's actually pretty sad if you take a step back from all of this and take an objective look at it.

True. I like looking at the charts, but that's because I like statistical analysis. It's really the logical fallacies and contradictions often contained in the same posts that are boggling to me.

 

[theBishop]

Gears of War was possible on last-gen technology?

No, but someone would probably argue that its gameplay could be done with worse graphics. I wanted to pick games that are beyond argument.

The hugeness of Lair simply couldn't happen on PS2 or Xbox.

 

[dammitmattt]

We're saying that they are hardly a first priority. They aren't nearly as important as you're making them out to be. Everyone can appreciate good graphics, but for a large percentage of the population, graphics are not going to be a dealbreaker for a game.

I'm not sure what you are talking about because I never qualified exactly how much that I believe they matter because it's different for every person. I was just trying to correct the ridiculous notion put forth with no context that "graphics don't matter."

Nothing more, nothing less.

 

[Kafel]

Funny how some members try to argue that the Wii is now cursed.



Winning is overrated

 

[LCGeek]

Until something like Lair or Mass Effect comes out that wouldn't be possible on last-gen technology, and you realize that graphics are only part of the story.

Wanna guess which sells more Lair, Mass Effect or Wii Sports casuals priorities aren't the hardcores priorities. I know your point is referring to how gameplay can change with tech improvements, but what does technology matter if people are preferring last gen experience. The real problem is most people can't readily feel or see the difference, I'm still trying to explain resolution to my friend with the 360 elite.

 

[JB1981]

I like how big-budget titles are simply not feasible now that the Wii is out. They don't make any money, guys! They never did. That's why all those big PS2 titles have so many ****ing sequels!

 

[Tobor]

No, but someone would probably argue that its gameplay could be done with worse graphics. I wanted to pick games that are beyond argument.

The hugeness of Lair simply couldn't happen on PS2 or Xbox.

Lair is not a good case for your argument. Pick a game that isn't possible on last gen AND won't be a huge flop.

 

[Razoric]

Lair is not a good case for your argument. Pick a game that isn't possible on last gen AND won't be a huge flop.

What do sales of the game have to do with the fact that it couldnt be done 'last-gen'?

 

[mcgarrett]

Until something like Lair or Mass Effect comes out that wouldn't be possible on last-gen technology, and you realize that graphics are only part of the story.

Except that the Wii is being targeted in part at an audience that find those sorts of games nerdy.

 

[Pureauthor]

What do sales of the game have to do with the fact that it couldnt be done 'last-gen'?

Because the line of the argument was of a game that would make consumers sit up and take note of the PS3's awesomeness.

 

[schuelma]

What do sales of the game have to do with the fact that it couldnt be done 'last-gen'?

Well, I think this discussion is pretty sales oriented.

 

[dammitmattt]

In order to be a costumer you must want the product at that price and being able to pay so much. People who do not like the product, people who think it is to expensive or people that can afford them are not costumers. Thats one tipical confusion amongst people.

Nintendo cares about the people who want a wii and can pay for it. For the rest of people they dont care.

They only care about people to the extent that those people spend money on their products. They don't "care" about the consumer in the way that you care about your mom or your dog.

Are people buying HDTV sets because HDTV or because they are bigger, flatter and prettier? I think you will be surprised at the answer. Most techie people think about specs first, resolution, pixels colours, blah blah. People think about convenience, status and other things.

Do the millions of ipod users care about OGG? Or do they use the more shitty sounding MP3? Do they like the convenience of having all their songs in a cool little easy to use machine? Or do they go around with superior sounding discman?

At the end like in most of this cases is a problem of the view of a techie against the view of the majority. The mojority seems to love the Wii and DS and the techies still wonder why

The answer to your scenarios is "both."

No, they aren't buying those games anymore. Know why?

Because there're no longer N64 and PS1 games to buy.

Your logic astounds.

Even on the portable space, consumers are flocking en masse to the DS and choosing it over the PSP. Why is that?

People like the DS for a number of reasons - more good games, more unique and innovative games, games with broader appeal to the masses, cheaper price, more portable and more durable, etc.

Quit trying to distort my point that N64-level graphics are not good enough for console gamers, which kills the argument that graphics don't matter.

 

[Tobor]

What do sales of the game have to do with the fact that it couldnt be done 'last-gen'?

His original point is that Lair is going to make us all see the importance of next gen other than graphics. I don't think it will if no one plays it.

 

[theBishop]

Except that the Wii is being targeted in part at an audience that find those sorts of games nerdy.

Are you talking about the audience that creamed their pants over an elf saving a princess in the fantasy land of Hyrule, or the audience that spends hours petting virtual puppies on a touch screen?

See how that works?

 

[koam]

Here's the entire article:

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fort...11/100083454/index.htm?postversion=2007053112

The word "Nintendo" is an amalgamation of three symbols: nin, meaning "leave to"; ten, for "heaven"; and do, "company." The most common translation in Kyoto is "the company that leaves to heaven.

Inside the remote:
http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/storysupplement/wiiremote/index.htm

 

[Razoric]

His original point is that Lair is going to make us all see the importance of next gen other than graphics. I don't think it will if no one plays it.

Ahh ok. Yeah there's pretty much only two games this year that will reach the mass market and attempt to push that argument: Halo 3 and GTA4.

 

[Pureauthor]

People like the DS for a number of reasons - more good games, more unique and innovative games, games with broader appeal to the masses, cheaper price, more portable and more durable, etc.

Quit trying to distort my point that N64-level graphics are not good enough for console gamers, which kills the argument that graphics don't matter.

You've yet to answer my question as to why the console market should be any different from the handheld market in analysis.

N64-level games are being sold, and they're popular. That's it.

 

[mcgarrett]

Are you talking about the audience that creamed their pants over an elf saving a princess in the fantasy land of Hyrule, or the audience that spends hours petting virtual puppies on a touch screen?

See how that works?

But which game was the pack-in? Something that everyone can related to, Wii Sports. There are a significant amount of people out there who like to play games but have no interest in bald space marines.

 

[Link]

I'm not sure what you are talking about because I never qualified exactly how much that I believe they matter because it's different for every person. I was just trying to correct the ridiculous notion put forth with no context that "graphics don't matter."

Nothing more, nothing less.

I'm saying most people are going to buy a good game regardless of what it looks like.